it will most likely past this week. and give media companies and law enforcement complete control over what you can and cannot watch. the one free space the internet. will stop being free. for americans

is this not what the 99 percent movement is based on. large companies having too much control over everything

fireside
—
2011-12-14T05:52:09Z —
#2

I wasn't aware of it till now. It doesn't sound like the right approach. It will probably take a long time to work out copyright laws that work for the internet. There's gross misuse right now. No doubt about that, but doing something about it that doesn't hurt the average internet user is the trick. It's like the spam. If only we could do something to stop that. It's so irritating.

darksmaster923
—
2011-12-14T07:47:22Z —
#3

I wasn't aware that it passed in the House yet

PnP_Bios
—
2011-12-14T16:15:22Z —
#4

It's still kicking around the house, but with out a doubt, it's going to pass.

ACTA passed. We still don't know what's in that. Apparently ACTA wasn't strong enough, so now we have this, SOPA will pass too.

The middleman is dying. Artists can now self publish to iTunes and elsewhere. This is their last big attempt to stay relevant. It was over the moment it became easier to buy an album via iTunes than going to walmart. It was over the moment Netflix began distributing original works exclusively. Indie developers are now publishing via steam or xbox live arcade, or the iTunes store. SOPA and ACTA are going to hurt a lot of people, but think of it as the giant falling from the bean stock and landing on a small village. Some people will get hurt, but the giant will be dead.

alphadog
—
2011-12-14T18:03:33Z —
#5

@PnP Bios

Some people will get hurt, but the giant will be dead.

Actually, it's worse than that. If this bill passes, the recording industry may die (doubt it), but that law lives on and can be levied by other industries in ways I don't think legislators have thought through. It happened with the DMCA. Essentially, SOPA gives any company the power to "disappear" another without due process if they alleged the second party was infringing on copyright or trademark. Chanel used the DMCA (if I remember things correctly) to close down competing sites, mostly all knockoffs, but some not, without any judicial oversight. Chanel itself determined infringement.

Think about in terms to us. What if some company claimed your game infringed upon theirs based upon their own internal determinations, no judge involved, and got you to disappear off the net? You have no recourse. You have no business. Competition? Stifled. And, it's not a "pirated" mp3 we're talking about, the recording industry notwithstanding. The thing is, there is already a judicial system in place to govern over infringement; this law is a complete f**k-around it. Makes my blood boil that people are willing to throw multiple businesses away to protect one incompetent one.

Luckily, while there have been some recent changes to SOPA that makes it likelier to pass, but it isn't a slam dunk for Texas' bought-for representative.

touch_the_sky
—
2012-01-18T11:53:06Z —
#6

Yeah, if this turd of a law passes, a LOT of sites could look just like mine today: animify.com - the only difference -> it would be real with no 'continue to your content' button

fireside
—
2012-01-18T13:35:25Z —
#7

I think before we try any kind of further copyright protection, we have to redefine fair use to work with the internet age. The definition worked before the internet, but no longer applies because we are all publishers now. Everyone except non-technical people know this or any other copyright infringement law isn't going to work, anyway. We've opened Pandora's box. I'm sure the Chinese are downloading anything they want. It only allows people to think they are in control anymore.

In a statement issued today (PDF), MPAA chairman and CEO--and former U.S. Senator--Chris Dodd railed against the blackouts, calling them "an irresponsible response and a disservice to people who rely on [the sites] for information and [who] use their services." Dodd also said that the blackouts are "an abuse of power given the freedoms these companies enjoy in the marketplace today. It's a dangerous and troubling development when the platforms that serve as gateways to information intentionally skew the facts to incite their users in order to further their corporate interests."

So, let me get this straight. It's not abuse of power when you non-publicly buy senators and representatives to vote in your favor, or to, for example, put a non-skippable header at the beginning of each DVD containing some crappy "FBI warning" explaining that piracy is a criminal offense. However, it *is* abuse of power when website owners try to raise awareness about a completely disproportionate legislations that have the possibility to pass, and urge their visitors to take action?

Reedbeta
—
2012-01-18T16:55:30Z —
#10

I also like how it's simultaneously a meaningless "gimmick" and "PR stunt" and also a dangerous "abuse of power" at the same time.

TheNut
—
2012-01-18T18:50:19Z —
#11

This eerily reminds me of the movie V for Vendetta. You have the protagonist broadcast a message to inform the public of what freedoms humanity has lost, and then the antagonist spews out rubbish to quash the movement before it becomes unstoppable. George Orwell may have been wrong on the date, but his projected future seems right around the corner.

fireside
—
2012-01-18T21:05:50Z —
#12

Instead of the blackout though, I think they should have provided information for writing an email to your congressman. Information is the real tool, here. I'm not sure who's behind it other than music and movies and they have some terrible mistakes to live up to as far as accusing the wrong people already. I think the last thing anyone wants is to give them more power.

Reedbeta
—
2012-01-18T21:17:29Z —
#13

Instead of the blackout though, I think they should have provided information for writing an email to your congressman.

They do. If you go to WIkipedia or many of the other blacked-out sites today, it'll show you a form where you input your zip code and it will come up with contact info (phone numbers and/or online contact forms) for your congresspeople.

this happened without sopa. use your imagination for what will happen once sopa becomes law

The US government has shut down top file hosting service Megaupload and had its founder arrested on suspicion of causing \\$500 million in lost revenue to content sellers.

The Megaupload sites were managed through an international network of companies, head-quartered in Hong Kong.

Although not a US company and not managed from the US, the fact that it maintained US servers and supplied millions of US visitors with illegal downloads was considered ample legal grounds for the federal government to move against it.

alphadog
—
2012-01-20T16:14:20Z —
#16

I think MegaUpload got what they deserved and should not be used as an example of how to think about SOPA/PIPA, by either side.

And SOPA is another thing why I would ban american goverment (with large and heavy banhammer). IMO they have no right to close megaupload.com - what about this case (just imagine, I've actually never used megaupload):

I live in Czech Republic. I paid them F.e. \\$99 for downloading LEGAL files just yesterday. I won't get \\$99, neither those files (as they're unavailable anymore) now. Should I sue US goverment for my money. Bam just lost \\$99 (note it is actually 1/10th of average month payment here!). Not that I did actually do it, but my good friend did (don't know how much paid), about a week ago.

And yet another one - I'm also leading local company and also I have my company website (almost the only and the best way to get customers these days). I also have links on my pages to bittorent trackers and distribute some my applications them (as it is actually easier for me) and so I link to torrent tracker that also tracks illegal software (actually I don't know if there is any tracker that tracks just legal software), does US has right to ban my site? According to how I understood they have ... and so should I rather install and run my own tracker? If I should then will the US pay me for days spent on installing and setting it up and will they pay me for going to ever customer to setting it up so it will use the good one?

This whole case is just to get few people more money from the heads of many others, nothing more. I hate these guys, who has zillions of \\$\\$\\$ and wants more (it reminds me of our goverment - same types there). I wonder whether they will try to shut down TPB.org (again)...

I was never a fan of megaupload but how many safety deposit boxes have fraudulent or ill gotten content in them. yet no bank personnel are ever arrested for it. it seems the only safe place for a server is in a bank

I was never a fan of megaupload but how many safety deposit boxes have fraudulent or ill gotten content in them. yet no bank personnel are ever arrested for it. it seems the only safe place for a server is in a bank

The problem Megaupload faces is that they allegedly (and, if so, stupidly) looked into those "safety boxes", they shared the content among employees, and they drove their sales on illegal content.